An anti-military candidate who is womewhat squishy on social issues.
The Reagan coalition used to stand for pro-defense, Judeo-Christianity vis a vis social issues, and fiscal conservatism.
Paul is fiscally conservative, and to the left of some blue dog Democrats on the others.
“An anti-military candidate who is womewhat squishy on social issues.”
BS.
Personally I never agreed with any Republicans on everything, even Ronald Reagan. It was Reagan who got the War on Drugs started, which IMHO has done more to promote statism than anything else in my lifetime. It would be nice to have a president who actually believes in rolling back the intrusive power of government.
i don’t think Rand Paul is anti-military, he is
anti national defense.
How is Rand Paul on social issues?
The ones that the official LP party wants all legalized, like no holds barred porn, prostitution, the entire homo rights agenda, all drugs legalized, no laws against abortions at all, and btw open borders with anyone allowed in no limits.
How is Rand on those?
If he likes the LP platfrom, he’s toxic waste.
You seem to be confusing Rand Paul with his father. He’s not a neoconservative, which is a good thing, but he’s a far cry from his pacifist father on foreign policy.
“..An anti-military candidate who is womewhat squishy on social issues. ..”
You nailed it.
Our country needs a REAGAN CONSERVATIVE, not a LIBertarian.
“Just what we need.
An anti-military candidate who is womewhat squishy on social issues.
The Reagan coalition used to stand for pro-defense, Judeo-Christianity vis a vis social issues, and fiscal conservatism.
Paul is fiscally conservative, and to the left of some blue dog Democrats on the others.”
I don’t think it’s accurate to call Paul “anti-military.” I think there is plenty of wasted/mismanaged money in defense that should be cleaned up. We also don’t need to have bases in every stinking country when our military can be anywhere in the world in 24 hours!
What we need is a president who will:
1. Make our military smarter (technology, spending, training, efficiency, etc...)
2. Enter a war with the intent of ENDING it DECISIVELY.
BTW, Reagan would not have won in today’s republican party. Rove would have sought to destroy him.
Agreed.
And he's a pencil-neck to boot. lol.